Steering and Handling Discussion.

[400exrider707]

Originally posted by number52
I would think it would push less with smaller tires on the front?

You want the front sitting a touch higher to avoid having the front of the frame take the brunt of the hits. Makes it glide over obstacles a little better.

Originally posted by atvracin74
The people who are bent on getting something like wheel spacers or ways around buying shocks and real deal AA-arms for the "ideal setup" are the people who dont have the cash it's not that they are denying the fact that wheel spacers suck ,and are not as good as a true setup... The reason someone does get wheel spacers is to save money meaning that for some it's just that 1000 dollar aa arms and 1000 dollars shocks are out of the question. Mainly this is a good subject over the matter, but i'm just saying that people asking these questions are more than likely trying to buy withen a price range... Something that they can afford ,and thus are looking for a way to get the best setup that they can for what they got... so if a way to help people get a wider setup when cash isn't their as much would be a great addition to the poll

Hey man, we have ALL been there at some point. I could never afford a nice set of Walsh arms. This is why I suggest saving, and waiting for a decent set of used arms even. Wheel spacers aren't the "cheap solution" they're just plain dangerous. Would you buy a car that had no seat belts and air bags already deployed cause it was cheaper? (I know some of you will answer yes to this anyways )

Originally posted by mad440
http://www.acdparts.com/index.php?page=atv/aarms
very similar concept to the suspension posted above, progressive link front suspension. Just wanted to throw this out there as i have not seen this discussed before, it is nice to see someone taking a different approach to suspension design, whether it delivers on its claims is another story.

To me, the gains would be minimal for the weight gained and more importantly... the cost.

[Baxter]

I am working on a little "big" project. I don't know where to post it and this seemed the place for my question, forgive if I posted this in the wrong thread ,section.

I am currently racing a 700xx in MX,XC,Dirttrack cross and Dirt ovals in the UK. I am some having fun and abit of success and want to make it better.
The 700xx front/rear weight ratio is way out of what I like it to be ,so my question is what would be the perfect front/rear weight ratio for this kinda racing. 50:50 ,45:55 or 40:60 .(Front:Rear).

I love the 700xx engine and the IRS suits my riding style.
Any help would be appriecated and I can take the jokes.
Thought I would ask and Thank you.

[number52]

Not as familiar with these bikes. How much frame rake does your bike have? That's what I use to dictate how much difference in ride height to run.

[Baxter]

Originally posted by number52
Not as familiar with these bikes. How much frame rake does your bike have? That's what I use to dictate how much difference in ride height to run.

I can play with the front /rear grip with preload and running 71/2" frame height with the front being 1/4" higher. I was looking for front/rear weight balance figures.

[400exrider707]

Originally posted by Baxter
I can play with the front /rear grip with preload and running 71/2" frame height with the front being 1/4" higher. I was looking for front/rear weight balance figures.

That's typically not information most enthusiasts have or know, but it'd be easy for you to find out, just get 4 cheap bathroom scales and scale the quad. Or if you have a buddy who races dirt cars, they scale their cars all the time.

[Baxter]

Originally posted by 400exrider707
That's typically not information most enthusiasts have or know, but it'd be easy for you to find out, just get 4 cheap bathroom scales and scale the quad. Or if you have a buddy who races dirt cars, they scale their cars all the time.

I have weighed it with and without rider which came to :
45:55 (fr/rr.%)weight balance without rider.
42:58 % weight balance with rider.
I was trying to find what it should be. The 700xx is known for having a light front end.

[400exrider707]

Originally posted by Baxter
I have weighed it with and without rider which came to :
45:55 (fr/rr.%)weight balance without rider.
42:58 % weight balance with rider.
I was trying to find what it should be. The 700xx is known for having a light front end.

I rode one very recently (first time on a 700xx) and even stock it was pretty quick. Pulled the front end up pretty easily. I liked it. I could see how a proper setup suspension would make it a killer quad to ride/race.

What it should be is a tough call. We typically don't set up according to weight balance. Get your ride height correct and check the sag and let her have it... You can make adjustments based on tire's being used, track you're riding at, and just how the quad is behaving. The light front end will go away with some properly setup suspension, even if the balance remains the same. I know going to ZPS all around on my 450R made the front end stay planted much easier.

[Baxter]

Originally posted by 400exrider707
I rode one very recently (first time on a 700xx) and even stock it was pretty quick. Pulled the front end up pretty easily. I liked it. I could see how a proper setup suspension would make it a killer quad to ride/race.

What it should be is a tough call. We typically don't set up according to weight balance. Get your ride height correct and check the sag and let her have it... You can make adjustments based on tire's being used, track you're riding at, and just how the quad is behaving. The light front end will go away with some properly setup suspension, even if the balance remains the same. I know going to ZPS all around on my 450R made the front end stay planted much easier.

Ok, heres what I have tried:

23" tyres down to 18"
20" shocks down to 16"(std and LT)
11" rims down to 8" on the rear
46" to 52" width
Ride height 13" down to 7.5". any lower and you have to change the camber of the rear wheels.
And it handles better than most 450r's.
I had a Lonestar Racing Honda 450r with PEP shocks before the 700xx. The only thing the 450r is faster is MX, everything else the 700xx wins.It just kinda fits my riding style .

[Baxter]

Originally posted by 400exrider707
That's typically not information most enthusiasts have or know, but it'd be easy for you to find out, just get 4 cheap bathroom scales and scale the quad. Or if you have a buddy who races dirt cars, they scale their cars all the time.

Thanks for the idea on the bathroom scales. Was trying to figure how to weigh the xx ,at a reasoniable cost.

[MtnEX]

OK, so I posted this thread

http://www.exriders.com/vbb/showthre...hreadid=491627

And then proceeded to read all 21 pages of this thread.

I was a little disappointed not to find any information regarding arms, shock lengths and calculating that... and further more the answer to my question.

I understand how to follow the directions and measure for shock length and shock stroke.

I also understand that you want the shock length to stop the down-travel rather than the bind points of the front end. And I understand that you want the shock to bottom before the frame hits the ground.


What I do not understand is rather or not a shock length and stroke being 1/4" short is a major deal, large enough to buy new shocks for the arms or check to see if the shocks can be lengthened that small amount?


When I consider aftermarket shocks I have bought for arms and when I think about stock shocks I have taken off stock arms.... I want to say no it does not matter.

None of those have ever been close to using 99% of the available down-travel of the arms.... and I can't see where bottoming with the frame 1.75" off the ground instead of 1.5" is going to kill anything....


But there might be something else I am not thinking about.